Agreed, but not a lot of folks are necessarily looking for "a decent investigator". Contractors for the federal government, for example, are often looking to put butts in seats...and if they can fill a seat for less than they're getting paid, they make money.

Some employers seem to prefer younger candidates, because they can often pay them less than they would older, more seasoned candidates. I don't believe in a lot of cases that the quality of the actual work being performed is the primary concern when hiring someone new...perhaps the thinking is, if the employer can't make a determination as the quality of the work, how would a customer be able to do so?

I don't think that employers do want young employees for CF. If you're thinking "young" then the employer is more likely thinking "cheap". That is, if they're not going to get experience in this field, then they want the cheapest FTE they can get with the right core skills to get the job done. This may often appear from the outside like they are discriminating against age, but it's more likely they are discriminating against people who have certain salary expectations, and younger people will generally work for less not having a mortgage, family to support, etc.

Personally, I'd want people with experience in the field over a cheap employee, but if I can't get experience, I certainly wouldn't pay a premium price up front.

It's my experience that your earning potential as an attorney is significantly higher than being on the IT or investigative sides of digital evidence, certainly in the US. Have you considered using your skillset for eDiscovery?

The all want Experience, period. While I know what it is, and don't think I would have a problem picking stuff up, I have no direct experience in Ediscovery...and that seems to make employers say "we'll keep your resume on file." ya, right.